Normative
Law, contract, or formal standard in scope
The canon separates requirements, findings, frameworks, guidance, methods, examples, and local choices before any principle can inform report work.
A standard can govern behavior without proving unique perceptual superiority. A study can support an effect without governing a business context.
Law, contract, or formal standard in scope
Replication, convergence, or strong synthesis
A primary study; independent support not assumed
Academic model for design or evaluation
Institutional interpretation, not a requirement
Professional method treated as a hypothesis
Craft or influence, not a general rule
Local operational choice without superiority claim
Identify the primary or authoritative source, access, limits, and verification state.
Record actual claims, population, task, outcome, contrary evidence, and replication.
Write the narrowest candidate with scope, confidence, boundary, and evaluation.
Test report work and readers; accept, condition, reject universally, or retire.
Official-record checks the issuer’s record. Citation-checked confirms identity and reported contribution. Full-text-reviewed records relevant pages or rules.
No source is yet full-text-reviewed in the initial register, so initial principles remain candidates.
Representative recurring reports from biai-os supply realistic tasks, practices, failures, and readers.
Audits and reader studies will measure lookup and comparison accuracy, signal detection, qualification recall, confidence calibration, decision identification, accessibility, effort, and longitudinal recognition. Existing chart bans, IBCS adaptations, XmR rules, confidence labels, and report anatomy face the same review as outside claims.